| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1052 2002 SLD 1052 2002 PCRLJ 1972 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1108 of 1999, heard on 19th March, 2002.
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM UZ ZAMAN AND M.A. SHAHID SIDDIQUI, JJ
Asghar Khan Rokhari for Appellant. Nazeer Ahmad Qureshi for the Complainant. Abdul Rasheed Moman for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 1108 of 1999, heard on 19th March, 2002.
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM UZ ZAMAN AND M.A. SHAHID SIDDIQUI, JJ
Asghar Khan Rokhari for Appellant. Nazeer Ahmad Qureshi for the Complainant. Abdul Rasheed Moman for the State.
NEIMAT ULLAH KHAN---Appellant
VS
THE STATE --Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302/34
Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302/34 Appreciation of evidence Sentence, reduction in Case was of promptly lodged F.I.R. in which all necessary details had been given Promptness in lodging F:I.R. had eliminated all possibilities of fabrication and false involvement of accused Eye witnesses who were natural witnesses had supported prosecution case verbatim Complainant and eye witness who was uncle of deceased was present in house of deceased at relevant .time and he followed deceased when deceased was called by co accused and had witnessed the occurrence Other eye¬witness who was a resident of the area was passing by when occurrence took place Place of occurrence being common thoroughfare, presence of said eye witness at spot at relevant time was natural and free of doubt Both eye witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross examination, but defence had failed to shatter credibility of witnesses nor it had succeeded to bring on record even an iota of evidence to show that said witnesses had any malice to falsely implicate accused in the case Ocular account stood corroborated by medical evidence Some discrepancies pointed out by accused in statements of eye witnesses during cross-¬examination were not of the nature as to cast doubt on their credibility as their statements inspired confidence for placing implicit reliance on them even in absence of any corroborative piece of evidence ¬Medical evidence had provided full support to the ocular account—Time of occurrence, weapons used and injuries stated by eye witnesses were all confirmed by medical evidence Prosecution, however, failed to prove motive part of its case and to place on record any documentary evidence to show that at the time of occurrence accused was not teenager whereas Birth Certificate produced by accused had shown that on the day of occurrence he was about 17 years and 4 months Prosecution had proved its case against accused to the hilt, but since it had failed to prove motive as set up in F.I.R. coupled with the fact that accused at time of occurrence was teenager taking lenient view, sentence, of death awarded to accused by Trial Court was reduced to imprisonment for life. Asghar Khan Rokhari for…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492